HC Deb 21 June 1977 vol 933 cc1568-70
Mr. Dodsworth

I beg to move Amendment No. 79, in page 22, line 21 at end insert: 'Provided that a draft of any such grant, stating the amount and terms proposed, shall be laid before and approved by resolution of the House of Commons'.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

With this we may take amendment No. 74, in page 22, line 21 at end insert: '( ) Before making a grant to a person under this section, the Secretary of State shall satisfy himself that the information and advice disseminated by that person is accurate and of genuine usefulness to the users of goods and service.'

Mr. Dodsworth

Members of the Committee will recall the debate on the Question "That Clause 18 stand part of the Bill" in connection with the expenditure of moneys on information on prices, particularly grants. I shall address myself briefly to the narrow point of the control of the amount. There was some discussion in Committee about the form of control and whether, in fact, the inclusion of £3.5 million in the Estimates was sufficient control. The point was rightly made during the course of the debate that there was no statutory limit on the amount of money and that it was not difficult for the Department or the Minister to say "This authorises me to spend the money". But the real control lies elsewhere since it has to be agreed with the Treasury. As my hon. Friend for Hertfordshire, South (Mr. Parkinson) has said, that would enable the Minister to agree almost any sum of money with the Treasury and to put it in the Estimates.

That is not the right way to control expenditure. I suggest that we should use the Statutory Instrument which should be approved by the affirmative resolution of this House. It is on that point that I propose the amendment.

Mr. John Fraser

We put this clause in the Bill in order to have an expression of parliamentary approval for money spent on consumer advice services and price surveys. The amendment would place an intolerable burden on the House.

Since hundreds of small grants are made for consumer advice and price surveys, each one would require the affirmative approval of the House. That would be a waste of time.

Secondly—and I do not mean to be unkind—the amendment is defective. One cannot give approval to the draft of a grant. What one should give approval to is the draft of an order. For that reason I urge the hon. Member for Hertfordshire, South-West (Mr. Dodsworth) to withdraw the amendment.

Mr. Sainsbury

I briefly want to refer to amendment No. 74 which states that Before making a grant to a person under this section, the Secretary of State shall satisfy himself that the information and advice disseminated by that person is accurate and of genuine usefulness to the users of goods and service. I was glad to note that the Minister of State during the Standing Committee proceedings on 24th May recognised that it is not possible to compare value as between one commodity and another. Indeed, that is one of the difficulties and risks inherent in price surveys. I was sorry to find in the Department's Circular 1/77 regarding the collection and publication of local price information that no reference was made to the recognition that the Minister made in Committee, nor was there any reference at all to encouraging those concerned to check the accuracy of the information that they put out.

This is an area where misinformation can be more damaging and dangerous than no information at all. In other circumstances, I had expected a somewhat lengthy discussion on the sort of error that could creep into these surveys of which I have considerable documentation. Incidentally, the first one to which I wished to refer was a confusion between streaky bacon and second-cut back bacon. That is perhaps not an altogether difficult confusion to make, but it is certainly misleading to the consumer.

Mr. John Fraser

For anyone who used to cut up bacon as a kid, it is a mistake that the hon. Gentleman should not make at all.

Mr. Sainsbury

I agree that it should not be made. But clearly, apart from relative errors of fact and the confusion of commodities, many other mistakes are made. The Minister should recognise this, and I hope that he will take note of the need to encourage accuracy in this service

I end by referring to my favourite error. It concerns instant coffee, which was shown as being 36p for 4 ozs. The available commodities in the shop were a 4-oz. jar of granules at 39p, a 4-oz. jar of powdered coffee at 38p and a 4-oz. refill pack at 35p. Here were three chances to get the figure right, and one would have thought that the Department would have done so. But it failed on all three counts.

Mr. John Fraser

The opposition of the hon. Member for Hove (Mr. Sainsbury) to the Bill has been titanic, and as the Titanic sinks, he is still in the ballroom listening to the orchestra playing. I give him the assurance that we have tried to ensure that all our price surveys are accurate. However, there may be mistakes. I am sorry that this is occasionally the case, but I also understand that there are sometimes mistakes on the shelves at Sainsbury. I apologise if we make mistakes, but I assure the hon. Gentleman that we shall try to correct them.

Mr. Dodsworth

Although a procedure is used on particular occasions it does not necessarily have the authenticity of truth. It may be burdensome for a procedure to be followed but that does not mean that it is the wrong procedure. There may be difficulties in the drafting of the amendment. For that reason, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Forward to